Effects of traction methods in inexperienced endoscopists during colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection

Abstract

Background

colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) remains a technical challenge, but traction devices show promise in making this procedure easier. However, the efficacy of traction techniques for colorectal ESD is still unknown for inexperienced endoscopists.

Methods

We selected 400 patients who underwent colorectal ESD performed by four inexperienced endoscopists. Each patient in the traction-assisted ESD (TA-ESD) group was matched to a patient in the conventional ESD (C-ESD) group according to propensity scores.

Results

One-to-one propensity score-matching analysis created 87 matched pairs. The self-completion rate in the TA-ESD group is significantly higher than that in the C-ESD group (100% [87/87] vs. 92% [80/87], p < 0.001). The median resection speed was significantly faster in the TA-ESD group than that in the C-ESD group (27 mm²/min [IQR, 19.5–47.3] vs.18 mm²/min [IQR, 13.5–33.8], p < 0.001) and the procedure time in the TA-ESD group was significantly shorter than that in the C-ESD group (33 min [IQR, 27–47] vs.53 min [IQR, 38–73], p < 0.001). However, the histologic complete resection rate was not significantly different between the TA-ESD and C-ESD groups (93.1% [6/87]) vs. 96.6% [3/87], p < 0.1888, respectively). The en bloc resection rate (96.6%) and perforation rate (4.6%) were equivalent between the TA-ESD group and the C-ESD group.

Conclusion

Traction techniques seem to improve resection speed and self-completion rate of colorectal ESD for inexperienced endoscopists.

Keywords:

• Traction methods
• colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection
• propensity score matching analysis
• inexperienced endoscopist

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors

Additional information

Funding

The work was not supported by any funding agency.